Student researchers approached 80 undergraduate students (29 female) at various public locations on campus and asked them to participate in a study on ethical decision making. Participants first read the same eight scenarios used in the original study. Each scenario described a situation in which the protagonist behaved in an unethical manner. Participants were asked to indicate how likely (1=not very likely, 7=very likely) they would behave in the same way. Next, participants reported their socio-economic status using the MacArthur subjective SES ladder where higher rungs indicated higher SES and lower rungs indicated lower SES. The eight scenarios had good internal reliability (CronbachÃ¢Â€Â™s alpha=.77) and so participantsÃ¢Â€Â™ scores were averaged. SES was found to be significantly related to the likelihood of behaving unethically, r(79)=.24, p.20 (one-tailed).

Any Known Methodological Differences (between original and present study)?

The original study had participants that were more ethnically and socioeconomically diverse. Most of our participants were Caucasian and of higher socioeconomic status. In addition, the original studyÃ¢Â€Â™s participants completed their surveys at individual computer terminals. Our participants took surveys with paper and pencil.